9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed it to be revenue receipts. The appellant has challenged he addition stating that the amount in question is a contribution received from a charitable trust whose income is exempt u/s 12A of the I.T. Act. However, there is no merit in this submission as the nature of the receipts in the hands of the appellant is revenue irrespective of the source from where it has been received. The AO's action in treating these receipts as revenue receipts is upheld - ground of appeal is dismissed. Addition on account of hiring charges, in respect of tools and Plants - Appellant had treated this income as capital receipts stating that these have been received in connection with the capital work undertaken by the appellant on behalf of the market committees. The AO however treated these to be a Revenue receipts. The appellant has not elaborated as to how the AO's action in treating these receipts as Revenue receipts is against law. Therefore, the action of the AO in treating the receipts form hire charges of tool & plants is revenue receipts is upheld - This ground of appeal is dismissed. Addition on account of honorarium paid to the Chairman – Held that:- Addition has been made on the groun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considering the facts of the case correctly and is illegal, bereft of merits and deserves to be deleted. It is prayed that addition of Rs.1202550 may kindly be ordered to be deleted. 5. That the CIT (A) has erred both on facts and law in ft/confirming the addition of Rs.30190158 on account of sums received from HRDF being contribution received from a charitable trust exempt under section 12A of Income tax Act. The addition has been confirmed without considering the facts of the case correctly and is illegal, bereft of merits and deserves to be deleted. It is prayed that addition of Rs.30190158 may kindly be ordered to be deleted. 6. That the CIT (A) has erred both on facts and law in confirming the addition of Rs.3601663 on account of hiring charges in respect of tools and plants. The addition has been confirmed without considering the facts of the case correctly and is illegal , bereft of merit and deserves to be deleted. It is prayed that addition of Rs.3601663 may kindly be ordered to be deleted. 7. That the CIT (A) has erred both on facts and law in confirming the addition of a sum of Rs.256429 on account of honorarium paid to the chairman. The addition has been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal, in assessee's own case, the same is, respectfully followed and the ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 6. In Ground Nos. 3 4, the assessee contended that CIT(A) erred in confirming the additions of Rs.29,47,650/- and Rs.12,02,550/- on account of sale of tender forms and establishment fees, paid to the contractor respectively. Ld. 'AR' stated, that the issues are covered against the assessee vide para 5 of the order of the Tribunal , in assessee's own case (supra) . For the purpose of ready reference and appreciation of the issues and findings, the relevant findings are reproduced hereunder : 5. Ground No. 6 and 7 relate to additions of Rs.10,57,800/ - and Rs.6,00,700/- on account of sale on tender forms and establishment fees paid by the cont ractorrespectively. On these additions also, we find that the CIT(Appeals) has not iced that in the immediately preceding assessment year, the issue was decided against the assessee and following the same, impugned addition has been upheld. The said position continues even before us and there is no material brought on record by the appellant to the contrary. Accordingly, Ground Nos. 6 7 raised by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... harges received in respect of tools plants. The appellant had treated this income as capital receipts stating that these have been received in connection with the capital work undertaken by the appellant on behalf of the market committees. The AO however treated these to be a Revenue receipts. The appellant has not elaborated as to how the AO's action in treating these receipts as Revenue receipts is against law. Therefore, the action of the AO in treating the receipts form hire charges of tool plants is revenue receipts is upheld. This ground of appeal is dismissed. 8 (i) A bare perusal of the facts of the case and the relevant record, it is evident that such receipts cannot be treated as capital receipts and hence, findings of the CIT(A), do not suffer from any infirmity and the same are upheld. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is dismissed. 9. In Ground No.7, assessee contended that CIT(A) erred both on facts and law in confirming the addition of a sum of Rs.2,56,429/-, on account of honorarium paid to the Chairman. 9 (i) In the case of present appellate proceedings, ld. 'AR' contended that to run administration of the Board, it is essential that som ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
